News

Labor took aim at Glazer — and fired

With Steve Glazer’s defeat in the 16th Assembly District, organized labor fired a warning shot to any other Democrat thinking of deserting the base.

“That’s the lesson I think was learned here: Having a lot of money from corporations may help you produce nice TV ads, but it doesn’t convince voters that you’ll stand with working people once you get into the legislature,” said Steve Smith of the California Labor Federation.

In response to two BART walkouts in 2013 — which cost the Bay Area an estimated $73 million per day — Glazer made banning public transit strikes the centerpiece of his campaign, something no serious Democratic candidate in California had previously attempted.

Critics of the unions said the 16th AD race exemplified the pervasive political and financial clout of labor in state politics.

The $4 million contest, dominated by labor and business interests, was one of the costliest campaigns of the top-two primary, according to financial disclosure records on file with the secretary of state. The lion’s share of the spending reflected payment by independent committees played a crucial role in the campaign.

Attorney Catharine Baker, the only Republican vying for the seat, came in with 36 percent of the vote. Democrats, although a majority in the district, split their vote: Their battle was between two Democrats, Dublin Mayor Tim Sbranti and Glazer, an Orinda city council member, whose competition for the seat divided the Democratic Party into centrist and left-leaning voters. Sbranti won handily, by more than a seven point margin.

Glazer ran into trouble early.

In response to two BART walkouts in 2013 — which cost the Bay Area an estimated $73 million per day — Glazer made banning public transit strikes the centerpiece of his campaign, something no serious Democratic candidate in California had previously attempted.

“Public employee unions largely control everything that happens in Sacramento,” said Aaron McLear, a former Schwarzenegger press secretary and a consultant with Redwood Pacific. “They proved that once again in this race.”

In response, labor unions launched a costly campaign to keep him from advancing to the November general elections.

Glazer’s position was “a real concern,” said Chuck Idelson, spokesman for the California Nurses Association. “If working people are not standing up for public safety issues, then where does that leave the general public? They really count on people who have a voice to be advocates on those issues.”

Independent expenditures played a large role in the outcome in the 16th AD.

Labor-backed Tim Sbranti, who had formerly served as the chair of the Political Involvement Committee of the California Teachers Association, benefitted from many independent expenditures from the CTA, while much of Glazer’s funding came from independent expenditures associated with realtors, investors and other business interests. In a 2013 interview, Glazer noted that “not one drop” had come from labor.

“All of Glazer’s money came from big corporations,” Smith said, contending that “Walmart, hedge fund managers, realtors, coalitions of tobacco and chemical companies spent about $3 million to get Glazer elected, and failed to do so.”

Glazer has been a longtime supporter and adviser of Gov. Brown, having worked for him intermittently since the 1970s; many expected him receive Brown’s endorsement. However, the governor declined to endorse Glazer or anyone else in the race.

Brown, addressing the San Francisco Chronicle’s editorial board, said he couldn’t recall the last time his backing made a difference in a California contest, said,“I’m not going to get into that race,” the San Francisco Chronicle’s political blog reported on May 16.

“Still, he noted with a smile, that Glazer has ‘plastered my name all over’ his campaign literature. ‘I don’t have intellectual property on my image or my words,” he said.'”

Campaign officials say that the year’s low voter turnout magnified the effects of union efforts and increased the proportion of voters on the right and left, putting Glazer in a particularly poor position. Only 18% of California’s 17.7 million registered voters cast ballots in the election, with similarly low percentages of residents voting in both Contra Costa and Alameda counties.

“Public employee unions largely control everything that happens in Sacramento,” said Aaron McLear, a former Schwarzenegger press secretary and a consultant with Redwood Pacific. “They proved that once again in this race.”
—Ed’s Note: Recasts 13th graf to drop language “realizing the power of the unions,” adds 14th-15th grafs for detail on Brown declining to endorse.

annjohns

not that I expect the writer or editor to respond to a lowly comment, but how about quantitative analysis of spending? Article states:”The $4 million contest, dominated by labor and business interests, was
one of the costliest campaigns of the top-two primary, according to
financial disclosure records on file with the secretary of state. The
lion’s share of the spending reflected payment by independent committees
played a crucial role in the campaign.” Later the quote:All of Glazer’s money came from big corporations,” Smith said,
contending that “Walmart, hedge fund managers, realtors, coalitions of
tobacco and chemical companies spent about $3 million to get Glazer
elected, and failed to do so.” So what’s a reporter to do? Uhhh, let’s see….how about report what was actually spent and by whom?

Anonymoose

It’s murky, because of the heavy use of independent expenditures.

Steven Maviglio

The expenditures by IE’s are reported on the Secretary of State’s website. As far the contributions to Glazer’s campaign: Monsanto, big banks, Texas oil companies Valero and Tesoro, big nursing home chains, Big Ag interests … a virtual who’s who of corporations that typically contribute to Republicans.

Steven Maviglio

Mr. McLear’s quote about unions makes no sense. The California Association of Realtors, JOBSPAC (funded by oil and tobacco companies), and Charter Schools all established IE committees that pumped MORE money than unions into this race. Voters were given a choice between a teacher/coach with longstanding community roots to a political consultant who advised the PAC funded by tobacco and oil companies. They chose the teacher, Tim Sbranti. If there was any “control” going on, it was the coordinated effort by the corporate business community to try to elect a Democrat who foolishly thought that being on the side of Texas oil companies, Monsanto, and Dow Chemical was smarter than advocating for teachers, firefighters, and police officers.

Gabriel Haaland

Right on.

Steven Maviglio

This is wrong and there’s no documentation for this: “Glazer has been a longtime supporter and advisor of Governor Brown, having worked for him intermittently since the 1970s; many expected him receive Brown’s endorsement. However, realizing the power of the unions, the governor declined to endorse.”
Could it be that Glazer opposed the Governor’s two main initiatives — high speed rail and the tunnels project? Or because Glazer used the Governor’s photos in his campaign literature to try to trick voters into thinking he had the Governor’s endorsement? We don’t know. But the speculation in the article is not rooted in evidence of any kind.

Anonymoose

That’s not wrong; in the 1970s, he worked for him as a college student. He also served as his advisor and successfully ran his 2010 campaign.

Steven Maviglio

Not disputing he worked for him. The last line of the paragraph is wrong”
However, realizing the power of the unions, the governor declined to endorse.”

Anonymoose

It’s not wrong. It’s probably one of many reasons that went into his not endorsing Glazer.

Steven Maviglio

It’s wrong.

Anonymoose

“Steve Glazer has spent decades in California politics, most of it in jobs that didn’t generate headlines – as a political strategist, longtime adviser to Gov. Jerry Brown and, most recently, city councilman in the prosperous East Bay suburb of Orinda.”

Amazing oversight in this AD 16 analysis. No one mentioned, not even the below commenters the first place finisher, Republican attorney Catherine Baker whose success stripped Glazer of many pro-business votes. So, in November Baker is going to do well taking a lot of business votes and walk away with the seat. And no Steve Maviglio. You are not going to beat her with your usual anti-Republican smears because Catherine Baker is both pro-choice and pro gay marriage. Ernie Konnyu, former member, Assembly and U.S. Congress

Guest

Oversight? That’s not what the article was about. Of course the Republican has the business votes. The point was business vs. labor and I suppose we’ll just have to see in November.